“Property values. The residents within 1,000 feet of the proposed path of the Mark Clark believe their property values will be adversely impacted. The residents would like to be compensated for this decrease in value without having to pursue any inverse condemnation action in court. In other words, they shouldn't have to go to court to get compensation for this. We should consider this ourselves.”

County Council meeting, Dec. 13, 2012

People who live within 1,000 feet of the proposed road definitely won't be getting any money to compensate them for drops in the value of their property, Pryor said, despite how some people interpreted conditions included in the ordinance when council approved the $558 million project in December.

Council approved the controversial Mark Clark Expressway project with a 5-4 vote. Councilwoman Anna Johnson cast one of the deciding votes after the group agreed to include an amendments that she proposed in the plan.

Her amendment stated that county staffers must provide County Council with a report on the “potential diminution in value to any residence within 1,000 feet of the proposed alignment of the MCE.” It also stated that county staffers must “make good faith efforts to evaluate and consider claims made by residents for compensation due to the impact of the MCE on their property.”

Pryor said that the ordinance doesn't specifically state that anybody will be paid. “Look at the ordinance,” Pryor said. “It said good faith effort. It didn't say we're going to put money in anybody's pocket. The ordinance is the ordinance.”

He also said that Johnson agrees with him about that. “Councilwoman Johnson never said anybody was going to get a check,” Pryor said.

Johnson did not return emails or voicemail messages left on her county and cellphones Friday for clarification on her intention when she proposed the amendment.

Councilman Dickie Schweers, an opponent of completing I-526, said he's certain that Johnson meant that people would be paid for the drop in the value of their property. “Compensation means paying them unless you specify something different,” he said.

But he never thought anybody would be paid. “I thought it was a promise by those in support to get Johnson's vote.”

The claims

Pryor said the county also has no intention of paying county residents who already have submitted claims for drops in the value of their property.

After construction has begun, people can file claims if they think their property has been damaged, and the county will try to mitigate that damage, Pryor said. But it will do nothing to compensate people for a drop in property values.“How can you say you lost value when it hasn't been built yet?” Pryor said. “That's an assumption, not a fact.”

Robin Welch, one of the founders of the opposition group Nix 526, said it doesn't matter what Pryor thinks. “It only matters what a judge thinks. Any sane and rational person can read her amendment and know she wasn't talking about sound walls.”

Pryor is “trying to scare people into inaction,” Welch said. If the matter ends up in court, “the judge will use common sense and see that monetary compensation for value loss was absolutely the intent.”

Welch also said that she's disappointed with Johnson, who has the power to fix this. “She can change her vote tomorrow. She can rise up and do what is right.”

And Nix 526, she said, will continue to encourage people to file compensation claims. “It's their legal right.”

Measuring the drops

Charleston County staffers released a status report on the Mark Clark project to council earlier this week. It stated:

Studies are inconclusive on how new roads affect property values.

The value of some properties could increase as a result of I-526 being built.

I-526 will be built as a parkway, not an interstate, so studies on the impact of interstates on property values don't apply.

It also stated that the county would hire a community relations coordinator for the I-526 project after construction begins. The coordinator would have an office near the site, and residents could talk to him or her about concerns connected to the project.

Welch called the report preposterous. Families who live in homes near I-526 “will be constantly harassed by noise, polluted air, and a nightmarish stream of headlights,” she said. “This report is nothing but a kick in the stomach to all the families who are fighting to protect their homes and futures.”

Garrett Kaufman bought a home on Johns Island about a month ago, which sits about 750 feet from the proposed road. He said he's certain that being in the path of I-526 brings down the value of property. He was able to get the owner to knock $80,000 off the home's $550,000 price tag largely because it was near the path of I-526.

Kaufman said he thinks it's unlikely I-526 will be built, so he took a financial risk and purchased the property.

Schweers said some property likely will increase in value if I-526 is built, and some will decrease. “Some folks are going to lose,” he said. “The question is whether we said we would give them monetary compensation. My interpretation is that yes, we said that.”

Reach Diane Knich at 937-5491 or on Twitter @dianeknich.

Keywords

Get more news delivered to your inbox:

Comments

Notice about comments:

The Post and Courier is pleased to offer readers the enhanced ability to comment on stories. Some of the comments may be reprinted elsewhere in the site or in the newspaper. We ask that you refrain from profanity, hate speech, personal comments and remarks that are off point.

We do not edit user submitted statements and we cannot promise that readers will not occasionally find offensive or inaccurate comments posted in the comments area. If you find a comment that is objectionable, please click the X that appears in the upper right corner when you hover over a comment. This will send the comment to Facebook for review. Please be reminded, however, that in accordance with our Terms of Use and federal law, we are under no obligation to remove any third party comments posted on our website. Read our full terms and conditions.